When I flop an OESD or strong FD in LP I usually bet

Obviously depends on board texture/number of opponents/pre-flop action/stack depths etc, but let’s say the situation is close to ideal for a bet.

I think it can sometimes still be good to check back for deceptive purposes.
——-
For example, I have 78o in a $1-2 game, I limp in LP after two limpers. No raises, we see a flop 5 ways (pot is 10). Effective stacks $140.

Flop 963r four players check to me. I decide to check

Turn 5, still a rainbow board

They all check, I bet 7, only the BB calls

River T, BB donks for 20 at the 24 pot, I raise 35 more, he tank calls with 24. He says ‘I didn’t put you on 78 because you’d have bet the flop.’
——

Perhaps usually betting the flop is the best play - benefits of picking up a lot of small pots, building a pot for when you hit, balancing our play etc

.... I did get lucky here, with him hitting such a big hand. This will be rare.

But I do think it’s worth mixing in a flop check some % of the time.

I think this is one example (among many) of the deception benefits of not ALWAYS doing the same thing in a certain spot.

Thoughts?

In a multiway pot where you lack fold equity but could get paid well if you bink the straight, checking back seems pretty good. Betting into a pot where you're not a favourite to win if you get action doesn't seem like an appealing proposition.

In heads up pots, straight draws often work well as bets with fold equity - partly due to blockers - and hand equity, but they can be checked back from time to time. Some flush draws can/should also be checked back, partly for the reason you alluded to: You want to be able to have the nuts in your range on the turn whether you check or bet. If you always bet all your FDs on the flop, then villain would know you never have a flush on the turn if you check back and the FD gets there, so he could exploit that by repping it to make you fold.

I literally never bluff anymore in 4 way pots. 3 way I think it takes a strong draw to bet. Heads up is a different story.

Yeah when it gets to 4 ways and more the quality of your hand needs to be insanely good to make a bluff profitable. I know it feels strange but playing almost 100% face up is the correct strategy in family pots, you simply have too little equity to do much else.

If we're talking HU, against bad players just cbet all your draws and don't think much about it. Against better players yeah you definitely want to start checking back some, start with the weaker ones, OESD with undercards and such or the smallest flushdraw.

Yeah, checking back draws can be good sometimes. Just today, I got owned on a 98JT7:diamond run out. I was in the SB with AJ vs. CO limper. I bet the flop and he called. Turn went check/check. River came and I jammed for 4x the pot. To my horror, my opponent not only had the queen, but he had KQ.

Multiway pots can be a pain, but I think you still have odds to semi bluff in them. In some multi-way pots against certain opponents I think you can make some interesting steals.

since this seems to be an argument in favor for "mixing", i want to show my disagreement. in almost all practical situations there will be a higher EV line. players being balanced to an extend where actual gto indifference appears seems to rarely happen at the tables. so that leads to the second part of the argument: there is no "the FD" and different flushdraws have different maximum ev lines, getting you a natural "mixing". for instance, you might want to c/c the NFD because it has showdown value with the A high, but check raise the smaller ones. or on the one card straight boards you have some pair+SD, some SD+BFD,some naked GS, all those hands play differently by themselves so mixing isn't required.

it is good to have gto lines in mind, but if they lead to mixing in spots where there is a clearly max EV line against a certain exploitable opponent, it is actually doing harm. it is important to keeping in mind that gto is not actually trying to balance ranges, but maximizing the EV of each individual hand.

fwiw my main argument was supposed to be regarding the op: you should NEVER mix in this spot. try to find out if betting or checking has better ev and then always do that. mixing is just an excuse for not knowing what to do.

FWIW, I wasn't suggesting mixing (although it might be the case in many spots where some specific draw combos will mix between betting and checking). I typically split my draws up into "best/dominating draws" that can bet/continue vs a raise, "weakest draws" that bet/fold, and "middling draws" that more commonly check back.
In a sense, unmade hands can be "balanced" in a polarized manner in much the same way as made hands are. i.e. bet the top and bottom, check back the mid-range. There aren't any hard and fast rules though, AFAIK. Blocking effects can help with deciding which actual combos make most sense as bets or checks, because a NFD with AJs might play differently to the NFD with A5s, for example.
That said, solvers can bring up some surprising results in which you might end up betting almost all your draws, or checking back at a high frequency, dependent on the board itself and how other parts of the ranges interract.

thank you for your input, i know you weren't suggesting mixing, but it seemed to be the tenor of the thread and there was not alot of resistance.
i agree that the work of solvers is often puzzling

I agree with 4-way or more pots, that bluffing goes down in EV. However, if you own 1/3 of a pot just on the draw, you could choose to invest a 1/3 to 1/2 pot bet. Sometimes everyone will fold, or you get 2 or more callers. In both instances you make money immediately.

Optimal play in multiway pots requires the player with the most equity to defend that equity, which is not nearly so straightforward as in HU pots. Optimally, the highest equity and the best draw should be the only 2 players that make it to the next street. Any third player is already losing money and could risk losing much more later in the hand.

A weak draw to the nuts is perfect for checking in LP since you own very little of the pot and could bink the nuts.

In 4-way pots it’s usually one way or the other, you either bet to build the pot/deny equity or you check to get a freebie. Should not require too much mixing. You could check the oesd that do not feature any other backdoors, I suppose.